Thursday, August 07, 2008

Extreme campaigning

Much talk these days about a couple issues. Let's take a look.

First, Jim Esch gave an interview to Jim Minge of the Omaha City Weekly. It was frankly a glowing interview, and gave Esch the opportunity to speak to his supporters who are the more likely Weekly readers.

And speak he did! So when the abortion question came up, Esch told them he is Pro-Life, know...wink-wink... not THAT kind of Pro-Life. You know, the ones no one likes. No, he's a good Pro-Lifer. And then he used a word to describe "them": "Extremist".

Here's the full quote:

The other thing that frustrates me with that issue, is you have two sides and really both, I think the Right to Life side is a little more extremist, but they think it says something fundamental about that person, because they look at it as a strictly moral issue.

The Lee Terry camp has jumped on it, and gotten a little bit of a news story out of it. (And on KETV, Jim's Dad is their spokesman?) Over at another blog, Julie Schmit Albin of Nebraska Right To Life even commented on the issue, calling out Esch for lumping pretty much every Pro-Life group into the "Extremist" camp.

Who are Esch's Extremists? We don't really know. Sure we can guess he's talking about those who blow up clinics or carry aborted baby photos. But we really don't know.

Of course, many Pro-Lifers were offended no matter who he was talking about. Without taking sides here, we are sure that many Pro-Lifers consider killing innocent unborn babies to be Extreme. That's a perfectly reasonable argument, if you're going to use the Extreme term.

But what this really gets down to is that Esch is trying to play both sides of the issue. He is in a relatively conservative district, and plays up his Catholic school credentials, so he's gunning for that Catholic, Pro-Lifer vote.

On the other hand, he's still a Democrat, and he is breaking on one of their litmus issues. So he's trying to let them know while he's a Catholic Pro-Lifer, he's not one of...THEM.

Problem is, you can't really play both sides of this issue. Scott Kleeb is finding this out with his refusal to admit that he's Pro-Choice. And Esch is finding it out with his ham-handed attempt to be politically adept on the issue.

In the end, he is not really pleasing anyone concerned about this issue. And by the way, those people tend to vote...


Lee Terry has also been out politicking. To show how this is effectively done, you need only take a look at his recent "Energy Relief Rally". He stood on a street corner, had a pretty decent crowd show up, and had people honking support as they went by in rush hour.

And then, he got featured in the OWH, and pretty much all the TV stations. That is FREE media there, kids.

And the Esch campaign's response? A counter rally? A pick-apart of Terry's policy?
No, they simply called it a "gimmick".

Nice. That's right up there with, "I know you are but what am I?" and "Oh yeah????"
How's that D.A.R.E. squad working out for you...


We had read in the papers that Scott Kleeb is GOING ON TV for the general.
We waited with baited breath for word on this mass media buy.
Well, we now have word from our sources:

And it's...$6,400. For one ad. During the Olympics.

Now that's a choice time, and all that. But ONE ad? Hope you're not in the bathroom when it comes on...

(And here's our prediction: a husky voice, a great deal of forehead creasing and squinting, and him using the word "we" when he means "you" as in "we need to sacrifice". But we'll see...)


See the new Kleeb ad here (on YouTube). Yep, we nailed the prediction. And is this the most gratuitous use of one's child? Possibly. Funny how back in 2006 you never heard him talking from his bachelor pad with mood lights, during his single days...


Anonymous said...

So many good things to comment on here.

Who are Esch's Extremists? We don't really know. Sure we can guess he's talking about those who blow up clinics or carry aborted baby photos. But we really don't know.

That is quite a play on words. You say you know, but then you say you don't know. I don't exactly know what you are talking about here. Maybe you could expound a little bit on that thought.

other good piece:

On the other hand, he's still a Democrat, and he is breaking on one of their litmus issues. So he's trying to let them know while he's a Catholic Pro-Lifer, he's not one of...THEM.

Hmmm.... I seem to think that both Ben Nelson and Bob Casey are pro-life Democrats. Here is a pretty good definition of a litmus test:

Your statement is a reach at best.

I guess Terry does do a good job of holding rallies and getting some free press. Pretty easy when you have the OWH gunning for him, but that is neither here nor there.

Another point. Aren't races won by who gets more of their supporters to the polls on election day. At this great rally that Terry held, was he able to determine who his supporters were by the honking horns on the cars when they drove by? Publicity aside, isn't it kinda a waste of time and resources?

As for Kleeb, I would guess the one spot is a tough buy when you aren't bought off by PACS, but that is just a guess.

Any word on if Terry is politicking in DC in the Halls of Congress? We all know what the minority leader is doing:

Leadership American can depend on!

Eric said...

Esch is just telling the truth, but everybody wants to jump on the "extremist" word. He's saying that if you're pro-life, and you think abortion is murder, then yeah, you're not going to be pragmatic about it, you're not going to compromise. It's simply the truth. Pro-lifers are bound to be more extreme, but since it isn't a moral question for pro-choicers, you can afford to be more moderate.

lnk said...

Esch put himself in this bind. He can get himself out of it.

I think I know what he was trying to say but, typically, Jim (uh, duh, umm, uh, umm) Esch isn't the most articulate candidate around.

Jim can either stand on his statement, modify it or apologize. Let's see what he decides to do.

Whatever, Jim (and not his dad) should address the press. The dad being on KETV was really embarassing for them. Was the entire paid staff at the New York City PAC fundraiser?

Cut through all the noise and vitriol from the lib bloggers and the fact is, there are two candidates in the race. But only one is pro-life--and that is Lee Terry.

Anonymous said...

Okay, Ink, tell us: what has Lee Terry done in his ten years in Congress to reverse Roe v. Wade? What has he done to stop abortions? Oh, and I'm sure he's got his applications in to start adopting unwanted babies, right?

Anonymous said...

Some pro-life people do not have to wear that on their sleeve and march in every rally or hold vigils outside aborition clinics.


COME ON - Run on some real issues and get off the fluff stuff.

Oh and I dont see Lee out there trying to adopt any of these children he so-called standing up for.

No matter what you think of Tom Delay, he is the most sincere pro-life person I know. He speaks out for adoption, has passed legislation for adoption and has adopted children. That is true to your convictions.

Unlike some people like Lee who are just using you to get your vote.

lnk said...

Anonymous--go read the web page. All the info you need is there.

Meanwhile, why don't you tell us why Esch lied to Nebraskans United for Life in 2006? He told them he was opposed to embryonic stem cell research in order to get their endorsement for the Democratic primary. Once he secured it, he then started telling groups where he really stood on the issue--i.e. go ahead and kill embryonic cells.

Don't believe me? Call NUFL--they rekoked their endorsement.

Here's the difference between Terry and Esch. The former is honest.

Anonymous said...

Why don't you address your past with Governor Rowland. You aren't being honest, Ink.

lnk said...

If you want to know who has a record of accomplishment on pro-life issues, then let's look at who the various groups have endorsed:

Nat'l Right to Life: Terry

Nebraskans United for Life: Terry

Nebr. Right to Life: Terry

We'll talk pro-life issues anytime the Eschies want to.

But the reason we are having this discussion is Jim's poor choice of wording. He's the one who said pro-life believers are "extremist."

Is Jim's dad gonna get him out of this fix?

Anonymous said...

Frankly, I could give a rats @$$ who endorses who. I make my decision on who votes for what.

I do my research and all Lee is doing is grandstanding on everything. Energy Relief - Lee is there to save the day. Right to Life - Lee is there to save the day. Ethics Reform - Terry there to save the day. Earmark Reform - Lee's there to save the day.

What a bunch of hooey. Lee is nothing more than a sloppily dressed windbag. He has been there for 10 years. Why now?? Scared to run on your true record of NOTHING??

Anonymous said...

What I found most annoying about the Weekly Reader story about Jimmy is that he told us nothing new:

-we ALL already knew that he likes to drink, he did get that DWI and has been visibly drunk in numerous places around town
-we ALL already knew that he wasn't "really" prochoice-I mean prolife-I mean prochoice-ugh, even I am confused now. I guess that is probably how his parents feel.
-we All, also, already knew that he was paying more for his new bachelor pad digs above the Slowdown than he can afford to pay on his measily little manager's salary that Mom, Dad and all the kids pay him. I really doubt that you can live there for less than $900 a month for a 2 bedroom in the "hippest" new cool area of Omaha. $900 X 12 months=$10,800. Duh, he is only getting paid $10,000 a year to make them all buckets of money.

The one thing that we don't know is, who on earth knows Jim Esch well enough in New York City to feel comfortable enough to donate to his campaign? I guess we will know very soon who the New Yorkers are that are going to pay to take all those folks to the polling places in November and just who they will be telling them all to vote for. The question is, will they vote before or after they get their free breakfast, lunch or dinner?

Anonymous said...

What has Lee done since he was there on the floor grandstanding on the floor during the Schiavo debate?

Did he send her family a sympathy card? Did he send them flowers? Does he truthfully know when she died?

Probably not! Lee is a part of the problem with Congress and like most of the rest of those bums should be tossed out for grandstanding and think they feel our pain.

Face it people, THEY DONT CARE!

lnk said...

Anon 6:34--

A two-word response to you about Terry's accomplishments:


The most significant law in decades on energy conservation--and Terry authored it.

You have absolutely no counter to that--we'll destroy your argument every time with it.

BTW--Hill-Terry was passed last summer (07). At the same time that Terry was getting major legislation passed in the U.S. House of Representatives, what was Jim doing? Getting fired (after one month) from Creighton Prep.

Anonymous said...

It seems as though Congressman Terry has been "there to save the day" twice this week (3 if you count the trip to Washington to demand the Democrats return to the Capitol for an up or down vote on expanded drilling). Where was Jim Esch,in NEW YORK CITY? I wonder how many of those newly registered voters that he "cares" so much about live there? LOL

As for adoption, only a simplistic troll would imply that adopting a child is something that a person should do to prove their self worth or dedication to a cause. This proves that you have never bothered to get to know the Congressman. BTW, a child should never be used as evidence of anything for an adult!

Lastly, morals. Where do you even begin with that comment. Aren't morals typically held deep inside of a person and reaffirmed in teachings from the faith you practice? I'll just leave it at that.

Anonymous said...

SS's Kleeb "prediction".....made several hours AFTER it was publically posted. And he shows he is still obsessed with Kleeb's voice. Must turn you on or something. Either that you prefer the whinny, Mr Rogers voice that Mikey Johanns uses (we know who that man is in THAT family and it ain't he).

Anonymous said...

Esch trolls----> answer this honestly (if you are capable of that:

Would Jim Esch make the same comment--in the exact same words--today?

Anonymous said...

I see Jim's web page is promoting volunteer night at Rosenblatt--the drinks are only a buck.

That's nice coming from Mr. .223.

Anonymous said...

Well, let me say something about Hill-Terry. What has that done???

NOTHING. China has more stringent Fuel Standards than America. Europe has more stringent standards than America. Australia has more stringent standards than we do. Japan has greater efficiency than America. Canada has greater fuel efficient cars than we do. South Korea does too. Hell, California has stronger standards than the entire country as a whole.

Where was Congressman Terry on this issue when he was in the majority?? Behind Chairman Barton and Chairman Tauzin, blocking this type of legislation from being passed.

It took a Democratic Congress and Baron Hill (His 2nd trip through Congress) to get this bill to the floor for an up and down vote.

Kyle Michaelis said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Kyle Michaelis said...

If Esch had said Pro-lifers are a little more "extreme" rather than "extremist", we wouldn't be seeing this manufactured outrage. Three letters difference - that's all we're talking about here.

Objectively, there's nothing offensive about Esch's statement. It might have sounded better with one less syllable, but anyone who reads the full quote can only really be offended as a matter of convenience.

I'm very disappointed with Julie Schmit-Albin for proving herself such a willing puppet to the Terry campaign. Clearly, after 2006, she's letting her personal feelings about Esch cloud her better judgment.

macdaddy said...

You guys are right. I'm not going to vote for that Lee Terry because he hasn't done anything. I'm going to vote for Jim Esch because he's....uh, why was I going to vote for him again?

Eric said...


Terry gets more endorsements because he wants to ban in-vitro fertilization and Esch doesn't. You want to talk about pro-life issues? OK. If we're throwing IVF in the pro-life issue category, then let's look at the whole consistent life ethic.

Lee Terry supports the death penalty: pro-death stance.

Lee Terry supports unjust war: pro-death stance.

Lee Terry is opposed to social programs which create the conditions for a culture of life: pro-death stance.

Ronnie Schlabs said...


Personally your argument makes me more inclined to vote for Lee Terry. Clearly the planet is already overpopulated so a pro death candidate would serve us well. Pro death on abortion, war, euthanasia, and the death penalty! Although Lee is only 2 of the 4 as you point out, the world will be less populated from war and the death penalty over abortion and euthanasia. Therefore he is my candidate.
I do not understand where you say Lee Terry opposes "social programs which create the conditions for a culture of life". As a corollary, do these same social programs also create dependence as well as increase the size of the federal government? I don't see how social programs create the conditions for a culture of life.

asecurityguard said...

If Ink wants to stake Terry's reputation on the CAFE standards let that be his own folly. Why are these standards so weak when compared to other countries around the world? Does Terry not think Americans can make these kind of cars? (See look Ink, I can sound pathetic and make childish accusations too!!)

Anonymous said...

We know what he meant. Some in the pro-life movement are single issued people. Anybody who has attended a GOP meeting/convention knows that to be the case. They work hard, behind the scenes and do their organization but could give a darn (for the most part) execept about abortion. And if you proclaim a different view you are no longer supported by them despite being 99% "right" on the issues.

They are akin to the protesters of the left with their constant parades outside of abortion clinics and doctor's homes.

These are the folks Esch is probably refering to...maybe he can ask his dad to tell us what he really meant to say to get some clarification.

Anonymous said...

I just have to ask the Terry people, why is it so terrible to have a candidate whose family helps and supports him? Are you trying to say that Lee Sr. and the rest of Junior's family don't help him?

Would you rather Jim Esch's family hate him and have nothing to do with his campaign? What would you say then?

lnk said...

Anonymous 8:27--I have complimented the family here in the past, and I'll do it again.

They clearly stick together and help each other.

I do think an FEC audit would be interesting though. All the family members max out to Jim on the same day--even teenagers. (Did Daddy spread some cash around to them? That's illegal if he did.)

But the point is Jim Esch should speak to the press himself, or have his press person do it. To trot out the dad is embarrassing--it gives the impression that "little Jimmie" can't take the pressure so daddy steps in.

Is mom gonna hold a newser next time?

Paul M. said...

Dear God. I just watched the Kleeb video.

Does he have to talk like that? It's like he's trying to sound like an effeminate Kathleen Turner.

Eric said...

If you want to support Terry because of his commitment to the culture of death, that's fine, but don't go around pretending he's the pro-life candidate.

As for pro=life social programs, SCHIP is one example. The Pregnany Women Support Act is a bill that Terry could vote for to show his pro-life credentials. But, if Lee Terry really is so pro-life, he'd be cosponsoring it.

Social programs can support the life and health of pregnant women and children. This alleviates much of the pressure which causes women to consider abortion in the first place.

I would argue that, done right, providing social justice can help people bring themselves to self-sufficiency. But, to oppose these programs out of some anti-government, libertarian fantasy is the equivalent of saying "privately, I'm pro-life, but publicly, it is none of the government's business."

lnk said...

Kyle--personally, I don't agree with your point. If Esch had said pro-life supporters were more "extreme" versus "extremist", it still would constitute a collective smear on a specific group of people.

What he should have said was "a few", or "small number" of advocates on both sides could be extreme.

Got alot of plans for next week?

He didn't.

Prep him better next time for interviews.

You guys have had quite a week.

Jim is MIA and misses three complete news cycles.

Then he insults one of the most respected voting blocks in NE2--Catholic and pro-life voters.

lnk said...

Sorry--last post was garbled. Got alot of plans line was at the end--after recapping Esch's week.

Anonymous said...

Ink, the only ones insulting the pro-life people are you and Lee Terry.

Your pretend outrage over him saying they're "a little more extremist" are just making us pro-life people feel like you are insulting our intelligence. Like we can't understand what he meant. And worse -- you're completely disregarding all the pro-life people who completely agree with him!

You are aware aren't you that a 2000 survey done by the OWH showed that 72 percent of Omaha residents favor keeping abortion legal at least in limited circumstances? The majority of people who are pro-life abhor the extremist views of the pro-life movement that are too extreme.

OmaSteak said...

Esch is a joke by any rational standard. Kleeb would be to without Ms. Jane's guidance. It must be so depressing to be a democrat in NE and have such stellar candidates. It's looking more and more like Obama won't have any "coattails" even if he wins, so these NE guys are just plain out of luck altogther.

macdaddy said...

I thought the Kleeb commercial was only OK. The problem is that I think of some alternatives to when his daughter grows up: wearing a burka after a few mushroom clouds decimate an American city or two when Obama, aided and abetted by Kleeb, abandons the war on terror and gives away the store to the Islamists. Or how about being burdened with a 50% tax rate, no social security, and agreeing to put down her parents because they're old and there's no money in the national health system to pay for treatment for people over 65. But, hey, she got that guvmint education!

Anonymous said...

Goody. More Terry-Esch stuff. Never gets old.

Anonymous said...

You know what? I'm guessing the Terry people thought they'd put the Leester on the tv news with this fake outrage over Esch's quote and people all over Omaha sitting in their living rooms watching the news would collectively gasp and say, "Oh my gosh! I will never vote for Jim Esch! He thinks we're all extremists!"

When in actuality the majority of people who saw the newscast collectively rolled their eyes and said, "Oh man. This is stupid. I hate negative politics. When is this election going to be OVER!"

Anonymous said...

Do all the labor unions know that Jim Esch is endorsing the firing of thousands of men and women in the auto industry by his constant rant that Hill-Terry should have gone farther-all the way to China?

The reality is that the auto industry needs to acclimate, as do Americans, into the world of more conservation. To do it over night without the ability to retrain and move workers into knew areas would just create MASSIVE UNEMPLOYMENT! Lee Terry is a lawmaker that understands the world does not revolve around all or nothing policies and that you have to work with both sides to come to a good solution and then implement policy accordingly. Maybe he learned this mediator philosophy while running a successful law practice, maybe he learned it at Creighton Law or UNL (or maybe even OPS), or maybe he learned it growing up. Where ever and whenever is actually irrelevant. What is important is that he knows how to work with opposing groups, in a give and take fashion, to come up with a fair consensus.

As far as Joe Barton is concerned, I am sure that he is wishing that he would have let Terry-Hill come to the Floor when he had the authority. Maybe you should call him and ask him?

As far as him being prolife. It has been my experience, as a human being that has lived about half of my life (I hope!), that people that are prolife or prochoice come to be that way in a variety of ways. One way is by faith which is typically instilled at conception or shortly thereafter. By family at any time during your life. Or by life experience and education.
Many of the prolifers that I have met have arrived there through life experience, education and faith. They are firm in their convictions and thoughtful in their response to this subject. They collected all the information, compiled it with their faithful teachings and have an unwavering support for the most innocent of life.

People like Jim Esch, that I have met, are always questioning portions of their faith that are less than convenient for their opinions.

The point is, when you open your mouth, you either are or aren't and you better know before you open your mouth.

Anonymous said...

"They collected all the information, compiled it with their faithful teachings and have an unwavering support for the most innocent of life."

But the majority of people (and it's a high majority) think abortion should be safe, LEGAL, and rare. Those that get "outraged" over Esch's comment are NOT in the majority.

Anonymous said...

Everyone wishes there were fewer abortions. Only prolifers wish there were zero obortions. Pick a side Jim Esch, your Catholic Boy merit badge will only carry you so far.

Anonymous said...

Its so nice to hear you guys talking about the deep Republican subjects like Kleeb's voice. But now that you brought it up, Iron Mike's voice has the deep macho sound to it. Sweeper might want to do a separated at birth (audio only) with Mr. Rodgers.

Gratuitous use of a child? Not any worse than Stephanie wearing an Alltell for Johanns shirt around.

You guys are great at running everyone down, but in the last 8 months, I have yet to see one printed reason why Iron Mike is the man. Is it his committment? To Nebraska, uh huh, Lincoln, nope, Bush Light's dream team? Ditto. His Catholic faith, his first wife, the Democratic Party, (Say what?)or his perseverance to passing and pushing through a Farm Bill?

That is the best thing about you guys. You love to throw crap over the fence, but get soooo upset when it gets scooped up and thrown back at you. This campaign is just getting started, and the Teflon King is gonna find out that it does stick to him.

And a personal thank-you to McPain for once again voicing his opposition to farm payments, programs and subsidies, as well as tax breaks and incentives for ethanol. If he bashes the Big Red, he'll hit the trifecta.

Anonymous said...

Anon--12:06--re-read your post.

You're a hypocrite.

You whine about attacks then do it yourself.

McCain is going to win NE and that includes NE2.

Word of advice--be careful on the attacks on Stephanie. A ton of people like her. Careful.

LWOT said...

Would it be possible for both parties to calla do-over and get someone else to run for D2 congressional? Both guys are completely uninspiring.

Anonymous said...

You mean the same Stephanie that lives and works in the DC area, and only comes back occasionally? The same one that told a reporter once about how she gives Mike a $20 "allowance" each week for spending, whether he needs it or not?

Anonymous said...

Anon12:23 If a ton is 2000 lbs, and the "average" Nebraska weighs 150 lbs, that means 13.3 people. Finally, the whole truth on Leavenworth St !!!!

macdaddy said...

Good grief. You're asking why people should vote for the Secretary of Agriculture, former Governor, former Mayor of Lincoln, who has the same stands on the issues that most Nebraskans have over a freshman professor at a small college who either refuses to take stands on issues Nebraskans care about or takes the wrong side? Same thing with Terry. Wow! You Dems just want to swing for the fences everytime and you don't want to do the hard work of running out the grounder or settling for a base hit here ot there. Again, you might want to talk to your neighbors. They don't think like all you anons.

macdaddy said...

The Dems need to look at successes like Nelson, Kerrey, and Fahey (electoral successes!) and find out how they won instead of listening to a bunch of Kossites who live on the coasts. Instead of running people with solid resumes, you insist on running hipster doofuses.

Anonymous said...

Too bad that same Secretary, governor and mayor who shares nearly the same beliefs as Nebraskans quits his jobs every time there is a possible promotion at stake.

Mayor of Lincoln - QUIT!
Governor of Nebraska - QUIT!
Secretary of Agriculture - QUIT!

The question is when is Mike Johanns going to QUIT the Senate?

Further more - he QUIT on Nebraskans when he left the Agriculture department to run for SENATE when Nebraska Agriculture needed him most to help pass the FARM BILL.

Good job Mike, atta boy! (pun intended).

Anonymous said...

In your baseball analogy, Macdaddy, you are absolutely right. The Dem's league doesn't have the DH, (Bush Light), to come in and advance the runners. Granted, he hasn't crossed the plate in eight years, but he'll try to get a couple RBI's in Johanns and Smith. Most of the Republican campaign teams have put Bush on the injured reserves list, but I'm sure the Nebraska Repubs will want to bring him in at games end.

to kyle said...

Kyle - were you as upset when Julie SA made herself a puppet of the Ben Nelson campaign?

Anonymous said...

The hypocrisy of people to be against embryonic stem cell research, but for IVF is astounding.

In IVF embryos are created KNOWING they won't all be used -- that some of them will be destroyed. At least ESCR finds a useful purpose for these embryos.

Anonymous said...

Macdaddy, the whole problem is that as a Republican, you can't hear what your neighbor is saying while you are telling them your opinion. It is surprising what you can hear while listening to them. The tough thing is, you will not like what more and more of them are saying.

Right Wing Professor said...

Question, does the 'Johanns as quitter' talking point have an expiration date? Because it's pretty darn stale already. If that's all Kleeb's got, maybe we can just cancel the election and save everyone from the endless monotony of campaign commercials.

By the way, anyone know if either Kleeb or Esch have taken a position (don't laugh) on NCRI?

Anonymous said...

Um, as long as Johanns wants to aspire for higher political office. It shall have legs and no expiration date.

I was always taught finish what you start. It seems when Johanns has to deal with tough issues he just quits.

Eric said...

Esch is against the affirmative action ban.

macdaddy said...

So Kleeb is going to quit his professor job and Esch is going to quit whatever it is that he does. Johann took an oath of office, not wedding vows. The fact of the matter is that people quit all the time to take new jobs. I never understood that criticism, especially in Johanns case. He got re-elected for mayor and governor and while governor, the President of the United States asked him to be in the cabinet. I'm not sure if the rest of you realize but that's kind of a big deal. That job had an expiration date of January 20th, 2009. So basically you're criticising him for not wanting to be unemployed. As far as the farm bill goes, the Dems completely screwed that up and if you think Johanns could have fixed it, then I'm just wasting pixels.

Chest Rockwell said...

MacDaddy, 1:39

Correct about Dem lightweight doofuses. The Dems need some heavyweights to win statewide elections. Maybe a Tom White or Chris Beutler needs to step up when a good opportunity presents itself. Assuming Nelson runs for a third term that probably won't be until 2014 when we have an open guberatnorial seat.

However I must defend Esch on abortion. When's the last time you've heard about a pro-choice person resort to threats or violence? Esch's opinion on the issue is nuanced like the vast majority of people whether they call themselves pro-life or pro-choice. Most people are in the middle on this like Jim Esch not beholden to absolutes like Lee Terry.

trip to the salad bar said...

Wonder if that means Esch will get David Kramer's endorsement?

Anonymous said...

Chest--you miss the point.

It is not whether you are pro-life or pro-choice.

The issue is a candidate for Congress who chooses his words very poorly. If Esch had simply said "a few" or "a small number of" pro-life people are extremist, that wouldn't have been a problem.

He didn't make that distinction. As a result, he hit a collective group of people with a broad brush insult.

Esch just isn't ready for prime time.

Anonymous said...

Oh sheesh Anon 4:47, the only people making this a big deal are you Terry people, because you WANT it to be a big deal. It's just not. Everyone knows what he meant. And what's more -- most people agree with him.

So let it go already. You guys are really looking foolish about this.

Anonymous said...

MacDaddy--not so sure that Jim Esch "quit" Creighton Prep after one month.

I've heard he was fired. Poor work habits (coming in late frequently), inability to do the job (didn't network and contact almuni like the job required) and not fitting in to the CP style (going out and getting blasted several times a week in public).

They (CP) allowed him to "resign" to pursue other endeavors.

Anonymous said...

Anon--the person who looks foolish is Esch.

What he might have "meant" and what he actually "said" are very different things.

He should learn to prep before an interview and choose his words much more carefully.

Who is he going to insult next? Ernie Chambers and the minority community in North Omaha?

Anonymous said...

Funny, but you want the "Johanns is a quitter" to have an expiration date. What about the stupid stuff ya'll have repeated about Kleeb (mostly lies) that have been going sinc 2006?? Tell ya what - when you stop those lies, we'll stop keeping the truth front and center and let it rest in the minds of the voters to ponder.

Z-man said...

Come on guys --- who has been telling and repeating lies about Scooter????

Anonymous said...

Anon 5:06,

I don't know if Jim is going to insult Ernie Chambers, or not. But I do know that Ernie already insulted Esch by pointing out that the only reason Esch is spending anytime at all in North O is to pander and pretend. But Ernie might be wrong. Jim Esch might come to North Omaha more frequently to check on the Agriculture Land that he owns with his siblings and probably to find more parcels of land in North O that he can leave completely vacant and collect thousands of dollars from the Federal Government in Ag Subsidies to let become overgrown trash heaps for the folks that really live in North Omaha to have to look at everyday. You gotta love the ability for wealthy people to milk the Feds for money that was set out to actually HELP REAL FARMERS.

But, back to the point, if Esch insults Ernie, I am sure his Fairy Godmother Susie will find a way to drop a financial treat on the head of Ernie to help him forget about Esch's mistake.

lnk said...


Esch staff----> Omaha TV stations want Esch's reax to the John Edwards story.

Where's dad? Can you get him to the station ASAP to go on camera?

lnk said...


Oh yes, they said they'll take mom if Esch Sr. isn't available.

argo said...

The left has "heavyweights"?

Being "left" means wanting government to prop up people.

Big Papa government totes around baby leftists until thier legs are spindly little sticks.

Some leftists suckle the government teat until they ethically resemble Jabba the Hut, but that's no boxing heavyweight. Just a lump of lard.

Anonymous said...

FYI - the 2 bedroom apartments at the Slodown are just over $1400/month...

Anonymous said...

Latest rumor de jour is Esch isn't even in the country right now.

I guess the stress of the campaign necessitated a 'vacation'.

That explains why Esch took back $15,000 in campaign funds as loan repayments. He needed the dough for his trip.

-----> Esch contributors: you gonna pony up more $$$ for that?

Anonymous said...

Here's something of interest:

CQ has a article on John Edwards that compares him to Enron.

"Just like a corporation that fudges its accounting to stay attractive to investors, Edwards committed a terribly unethical act by withholding information very material to his candidacy."

Anyone see a similarity between Edwards and Esch? The latter never disclosed his DUI conviction (.223 BAC)from 2001 when he ran for Congress in 2006.

Edwards and Esch=two peas in a pod.

Anonymous said...

I am so sick of hearing about Esch. I can't believe he is even running let alone be seen in public. Esch's Record = $10,000 earned income for 2007 + .223 DUI + 1 month employment at C. Prep + Fired + Are you kidding me.... + Plagerism + Seriously, is he running again + law degree with no job attached = ONE BIG JOKE!!!!

Anonymous said...

I am sure the Terry Campaign can run just about anything they want for a tv add to exposes Esch for what he is... LAZY! Laziness does not fly in the midwest and having daddy stick up for him is about as funny as it gets.

Anonymous said...

Any one going to the Esch party they are advertising $1 drinks. Nice coming from Mr. .223! Looks like he has not learned his lesson! I can't wait to see the Terry's staff rip him apart in their TV Adds. I wonder is jimmy boy will even have a enough money to run one add. Seeing he is only running to pay himself back from the last campaign I dont think we will see him on TV.

How much has he paid himself back? That is another TV add... MAN THEY JUST KEEP COMING!!!!

Anonymous said...

I would not forget that Terry also plagiarized on his website from GOP.GOV

Anonymous said...

Furthermore, Terry is still breaking House rules by having a video from the floor of the House on their campaign website.

Anonymous said...

It seems the Dems just keep grabing for something. What about the ESCH RECORD??? No comment? That is what I thought...... Not much there but Daddy and Mommy!!!!

This argument is not worth my time... Esch as a candidate is really a big JOKE. His resume is a JOKE!!!!!!

Anonymous said...


WHERE ARE YOU?????????????????

Anonymous said...

Lee? Where are you?

Oh yeah, you're spending money and energy flying back and forth to DC to grandstand and showboat while actually doing NOTHING to help his district or the people of America.

lnk said...

Anon 4:22 and 4:24 (Esch staff):

Taking 'talking points' issued by the GOP conference and using them is the reason they are drafted in the first place.

Big diff from what Esch did: plagiarizing a mortgage paper from the Brookings Institution.

Worse yet, when he was caught red-handed by the press, what did Jim do? He blamed a staff person. Two hours later he then admitted, after that lie, that he did it himself.

You are also wrong on the web page. Show me a ruling by the House Ethics Committee that prohibits the use of House proceedings by a campaign that gets the tape from the public domain.

There isn't one--that's why the Dingell video is still there.

I don't blame you for trying--you've got a very prominent Democrat (and House chairman) who recognizes Terry's leadership on fuel economy standards.

Every time you want to raise "effectivness," we're gonna point to Hill-Terry. And, your argument is destroyed.

lnk said...

Anon 8:24--Terry is in Omaha today.

Where is Esch? Is he even in the country?

Yes or no...

(Now we know why he took $15k in cash from the campaign--to pay for his vae-kae.

Anonymous said...

And how much does Madame Pelosi waste because she does not want to be inconvenienced to stop halfway to San Fran to refuel in America's Heartland?

Plus, I wonder what plane she took to China for the Olympics and how many of her family members were on board. To criticize Lee Terry for flying back to Washington 2 or 3 times when San Fran Nan wastes energy everytime she flies to California because she is too much of a Diva to spend 30 minutes on the ground in America's Heartland to refuel is ridiculous.

By the way, since Jim doesn't know any of the New Yorkers that are giving him money now, doesn't it stand to reason that Jim Esch should have been able to send those people an email and tell them he is a liberal pro choice democrat and referred them to Act Blue to donate. That would have saved a lot of energy AND he would not have had to send Daddy out to be his prolife face or an inept campaign manager to debate his energy posits.

Grow up Jimmy, those snickers you are hearing are no longer the voices inside your head.

Anonymous said...

Ink said: "Taking 'talking points' issued by the GOP conference and using them is the reason they are drafted in the first place."

Now come on, Lee's not supposed to use them word for word on HIS issues page and claim that they are all his ideas. I guess, that is, unless he has no ideas of his own. Oh yeah, looking at his "energy plan," it is clear he doesn't have any ideas of his own.

Hey, do you think it's a good use of Nebraska's taxpayer money to be flying back and forth to DC all month just to grandstand so he can hear his own voice? Not to mention the extra energy it's using.

BB said...

Something interesting about that City Weekly interview is that Little Jimmy seems to be backing off his "the only bill Lee has passed is a bill renaming a post office" mantra. It seems he is finally realizing that is an uninformed and easily refutable position. And did anyone notice that his web site says he is opening a Sarpy County Office? Why this late in the game and where is he getting the money to do that? He will suffer a resounding defeat in Sarpy no matter what he does, so it is nice to see he is spending his money wisely. I guess ill-informed things like this happen when your closest advisors are Mommy, Daddy, and a bunch of drunken undergrads.

lnk said...

Everyone should read Don Walton's column in the LJS today.

The Esch and Kleeb campaigns have been a footnote in the Dem. party's focus this fall.

Smart decision, Steve A.

lnk said...

BB--that's because Esch knows Hill-Terry was a law, Terry co-authored it and it passed.

That was last summer--around the same time Esch was fired (after one month) of working at Creighton Prep.

There's also Terry's geothermal energy proposal that passed on the floor of the House in 07 and was incorporated in the omnibus energy bill.

Plus the Pastor Wade Post Office. That's three--want more, Eschies?

Anonymous said...

Interesting how Ernie Chambers ripped into Esch recently. Add to that the fact that Esch is never in N.O.

I question whether Esch has any kind of outreach to the minority community. The only thing he has done is denigrate Terry's law naming the Post Office after Pastor Wade.

Subtle racism by Esch?

Anonymous said...

Wow. Calling Jim Esch and the Esch people drunks, thiefs and racists? The Terry people have sunk to a whole new low. I'm scared if y'all have children.

Anonymous said...

Yeah, what do you all think of Michael Phelps? He had a dui.

Anonymous said...

Let's face it--the D's screwed up badly.

Richard Carter would have been the much better candidate to put up against Terry. He has, unlike Esch, substantial accomplishments in life, is well-spoken and articulate as well as honest.

Esch has the weakest resume of anyone who's ever run for NE2.

The dad would have been a much more credible candidate--why didn't they run him?

BB said...

Anon @ 9:55:

I think Michael Phelps is a great swimmer, but I would never want him to be my Congressman.

Anonymous said...

"I think Michael Phelps is a great swimmer, but I would never want him to be my Congressman."

Why? Do you know anything about how he feels on politics? I don't, but maybe he's a Republican.

To get where he is today, it shows incredible leadership, perseverence, hard work, determination, etc. Maybe he'd make a great congressman.

Anonymous said...

Showing "incredible leadership, perseverance, hard work, determination . . .":

That's about as much of a non-description of Esch as one could make.

Brian T. Osborn said...

Nyah, nyah, nyah! Your guy is a poopey pants!

Is not!

Is too!

Is not!

Is too!

Oh yeah?


Prove it!

Make me!

No! You make me!

Poopey pants!

(repeat ad nauseum and you have this thread)

Anonymous said...

Brian--that's definately one of your more substantive posts.

One Out In The Third said...

Face the reality one point in our lives we have all been a "poopey pants." Some of us do grow out of it though.

Brian T. Osborn said...


I wish that those of us who get involved in political discourse on the blogs could achieve at least a modicum of respectful debate. A conversation based on issues, facts, and principles would be refreshing, wouldn't it? Tossing insults, misrepresentations and outright lies is so easy to do, it doesn't even take any practice . . . or intelligence.

I will admit that I have been pulled into the fray and have, at times, been just as guilty as the next guy of lowering the bar. It is so easy to do when we are generally arguing with aliases rather than real people whom we meet face to face.

In a real conversation we have the opportunity to hear a voice's inflection, see the way the speaker looks, and we can read their body language. On the blogs all of that is missing and we tend to make up for it by being nastier than we would in real life.

I've cut back on my blogging considerably because I've come to the realization that it is a tremendous waste of my time and efforts. Arguing with idiots really accomplishes nothing, they are too set in their ways and incapable of changing their minds when confronted with facts. So why bother?

Are you going to the candidates' forum at Fort Kearny tomorrow afternoon? If you are, you'll probably have the opportunity to meet me face to face. I'll be there.

Anonymous said...

Actually, Official Congressional Offices may use GOP.GOV talking points. Campaigns may NOT use stuff from an official governmental resource. Once again, he plagarized from the GOP Conference site.

It surprises me he could not take those words and make them his own.

Pretty sad!

Anonymous said...

I, for one, have never said anything on this blog that I have not said in public. Esch acts like the perenial sophomore, no longer at the bottom of the pile, but a lot of experience and maturity away from being ready to graduate. He seems to be running on his parents reputation rather than growing up and building a good reputation of his own. In case no one noticed, Jim Esch's reputation is not anything to be proud of.

I would be ashamed to tell people that I was represented by such a lack of character. Probably the same way Randy "Duke" Cunningham's constituents felt 2 years ago. I can say for a fact, I have never been disappointed by my Congressman's ethics, behavior and understanding of the issues he is faced with as a member of the U.S. Congress.

Can all the Jim Esch supporters honestly say that they have never been disappointed by Jim's ethics, behavior or understanding of the issues that he is trying to convince people he understands?

BTW, were any of you staffers for Esch surprised by how much money he and his siblings have taken in Ag Subsidies that are meant for struggling farmers not for struggling trust fund babies?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 3:20: What about a campaign that plagiarizes a position paper from the Brookings Institution?

And, what about a candidate who, when confronted by the press about the plagiarism, lies and at first blames it on a staffer?

Anonymous said...

I dont really care about Esch. Im pointing out the hypocrisy between the 2 camps.

Anonymous said...

I wish we had better choices for our Congressional delegation than what we have to vote for.

Terry is a whipped blowhard and Esch is an idiot.

Anonymous said...

Esch was in Afghanistan. You will be hearing about it soon!

Anonymous said... have a pretty nice blog here that's been going on for a while, and with so many comments, you apparently have a lot of interested readers, why don't you sell ad space?

Anonymous said...

Anon 3:39, what about almost getting his ass kicked by Jesse Jackson Jr.???

Anonymous said...

Oh, Nancy Pelosi is in the direct line of succession to the presidency, it is a HUGE security risk for her to be making stops along the way instead of going straight to her destination. There are alot of other things that waste more money than that in the budget, harp on those instead of this miniscule amount.

Anonymous said...


That is the MINISCULE amount of wasted tax dollars spent on Nancy Pelosi so she does not have to be inconvenienced to land at a MILITARY BASE for refueling on her way back to San Francisco.

Again with the TRUST FUND KIDS with no concept of money! I honestly do not know where to go with that one. The proverbial "to Hell in a handbasket" comes to mind, though.

And yes, I was glad that my Representative was not only willing to tell a blowhard to shut up, but was also willing to laugh and walk away from a "martial arts expert" that had lost touch with realilty (and could probably use a refresher in MA 101, defend yourself only).

As far as Esch in Afghanistan. This is so typical of someone that has no respect for authority. This country has been on critical alert for travel in all parts by the U.S. State Department. According to the State Department website, this means that the United States is unable to assist or protect any U.S. citizen traveling in Afghanistan at this time. Even State Department workers are not permitted to have family members living in the country with them.

While this may show that Jim Esch has "big kahunas", it really just shows a complete lack of respect for any authority-which we already knew based on previous behavior.

I will take intelligence and common sense over bravado, disrespect and just plain stupidity any day!


Anonymous said...

Esch and his whole campaign are a pack of liars. When asked last week by multiple reporters, Esch was supposedly "in New York fundraising" on August 4th. According to the WH this morning, he was in Afghanistan already. Why did Jim ESCH and his campaign lie to the reporters, his supporters, and all of the folks in the Second District? If Afghanistan is such a cool new place to vacation, why didn't they just admit that is where he was? I have to say, this may be the first time a politician would ever lie and say they were fundraising out of state only to secretly cross into a terrorist state. Talk about bizarro campaigning, I hope he didn't solicit any campaign donations while there, that would REALLY be breaking the law!

Anonymous said...

Yea that is pretty miniscule when compared to the ENTIRE FEDERAL BUDGET!!! Complain about something worthwile, like a wasteful war you idiot.

Anonymous said...

And your candidate, Jim Esch, wants to spend more on the "wasteful" war. The Dems are a really amazing group, while no one argues that Afghanistan needs attention, no one is sure what the Dems want that attention to be. We must be invited in or go in as we did in Iraq. We have not been invited in, cannot engage in Pakistan and I am pretty sure that none of the Dems in Congress are going to vote "yea" to war AGAIN-in caps because you all seem to forget that 95% voted for it until a couple years ago when they quit supporting it! BTW a "redeployment" is the same as sending the troops back-it just sounds nicer and the sand has different borders.

When you figure out what you want and how to pay for it, let us all know.

BTW, Lee Terry and all of the rest of the Republican House members that have been filibustering on the House floor for a vote on Drilling in ANWR have succeeded! Last night Pelosi said she will allow a vote on drilling and conservation efforts.

I'll bet you $100 she puts a poison pill in. AKA bigger and better taxes on oil company investors (there known as shareholders around the world). Get ready for a crash on Wall Street when she does it!

pizza the hut said...

Her bill will have so many regulations, etc that it won't even matter that she brought it up. It will be a sham of a bill.

What a loser.

Anonymous said...

Question: Would it cost more to refuel somewhere in the Midwest?

What are the costs, etc??

schip said...

Frankly, I think the whole Jesse Jackson Jr. thing is an embarrassment to Lee and the 2nd District.

He acted like a 3rd year old on the floor of the House while a bill is being debated.

He and JJ's words should have been stricken from the record. Too bad there isn't video of this exchange. Or is there?

Does anyone remember what the debate was about on the floor that day that caused the dust up??

I do.

BB said...

So many questions about Esch's trip to Afghanistan. For one, how did he pay for it if he only made 14k last year? I'm sure that trip took at least 25% of his income from last year. I would also be interested to know what role UNO played and how much they ponied up for the trip. Afterall, Prof Goutierre is a well know Dem whose son used to work for Bob Kerrey. And then there is the issue of him lying to the press and public about where he was, but Jim lying is no new thing.

Jim says he wanted to learn about the area and the "best way to to that would to be on the ground." How could he possibly learn about the complex situation over there by spending a week in Kabul? As a veteran of the war in Afghanistan, I know from experience that understanding the situation over there requires MUCH more than a week in Kabul. So now I'm sure Jim is going to try to represent himself as some sort of expert on Afghanistan because he took an ill-advised trip over. In doing so he will sound almost as foolish as he does when he tries to talk military strategy. And he clearly has no understanding of the political situation in Pakistan and how delicately we need to handle that situation.

Thank God Jim will never be in any position where he can effect policy in that region.

Anonymous said...

BB, if the trip was related to the campaign, he would use campaign funds for the trip.

I wish we had another choice besides the two doofuses running for our Congressional seat.

Anonymous said...

If he used campaign funds that would be up to his donors to determine if it were an appropriate use of their money, but, he did not. He told the WH that he used his own "personal funds". Again, where does he get all that money. I hope he knows that even if he were to win, he would not have a paycheck to spend on his rent until next year. Maybe he is counting on his Department of Agriculture subsidy checks to pay his bills for his Urban Loft?

I agree that Jesse Jackson should be ashamed to have been partaking in name calling with the Weiner and was told to shut up to which he responded F---you. This explitive that the Press in the Gallery heard, is the only reason a private disagreement between 3 Members was even noted.

BTW they were calling the Republican Leader a "damn liar" while the Leader was utilizing his time on the floor of the House.

Anonymous said...

Anon, it would not cost more to refuel in the Midwest and it would be at a secure military base. The point is, she insisted on a plane that was much larger than the one that Dennis Hastert was asked to use following 9/11. Her reason was that a larger plane was needed to fly directly to San Fran. On a smaller plane, the fuel use would be significantly reduced, but would need to be replenished because of its tank capacity. Kind of like a VW Bug cannot drive as far as a double tank pickup truck on one fillup, but the VW gets better mileage. For the environmentals out there,she is flying the equivilent of a Hummer when she could be using an Accord.

Anonymous said...

Maybe Jim and "Johnny Be Good" Bruning used the same travel agent. Oops, I did it again. I didn't mean that, I meant "What a wise use of elected Republican officials in Nebraska by sending them overseas." Let me guess, the AG was on a fact finding junket to see what illegal immigrants really look like. Give me a break.